Light Rail

About Joyce Clark

Contact information for Councilmember Joyce Clark
Home: 623-772-9795
Cell: 602-320-3422
Office: 623-930-2249
Please call between the hours of 9 AM - 5 PM
Email:
clarkjv@aol.com
jclark@glendaleaz.com
Joyce Clark is a 49 year resident of Glendale. She has a BA in History and Education and graduated from the College of Notre Dame of Maryland. Her past careers include teacher of high school history, small business ownership of a book store, a professional ceramist and was the founder of a retail craft gallery. Joyce and her husband, Charles, have three children and seven grandchildren.

Joyce was first elected as your Yucca district Councilmember in 1992 and served Glendale and the Yucca district from 1992 to 1996. Joyce took a four year break from public service when her mother was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s to personally care for her. In 2000 she successfully ran again for Yucca district councilmember as a write in candidate against the incumbent. She is the only candidate in Arizona to achieve a write in victory over an incumbent. She was your voice for the Yucca district for 16 years.

Joyce retired in December, 2012, and as a private citizen Joyce did many of the things she never had the time to pursue. Two of those are the tender care and feeding of her koi pond and blog writing on issues in Glendale, Arizona.

In March of 2016, Joyce announced that she would leave retirement and run for the Yucca district council seat in Glendale. Once again Joyce defeated an incumbent and on December 13, 2016 she took office as the Yucca district councilmember for another four year term, ending in December of 2020.

Joyce is the only elected official in the State of Arizona to have defeated an incumbent as a write-in candidate and then to defeat a second, different incumbent as a candidate.

This week, June 24-28, 2013 there are 3 city council meetings scheduled. First up is a Special workshop meeting at 1:30 PM today. It consists of Executive session (Esession) items only, meaning a secret session. We all know the topic of discussion is the Renaissance Sports and Entertainment (RSE) bid for arena management. It has been reported that the details of the bid may be released on Wednesday, June 25th. The only reason for this meeting is because RSE and the city (COG) are still negotiating the terms of the deal. There would only be two outcomes: 1. the council has accepted the terms and is comfortable with them or 2. the council still has issues with the final terms. Either way, this council has signaled that it is ready to put this issue to bed and vote on it on July 2nd. Keep in mind that just because the RSE bid has finally made it to a voting meeting does not insure a positive outcome. What it does signal is that the council is ready to vote, up or down, RSE’s bid and be done with the issue.

The evening meeting (voting meeting) of July 25, 2013 has 3 financial items of interest. The first, Item #8 is prepayment of $5.6M of General Obligation bonds (usually paid for from the city’s secondary property tax collection) by the Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund. This is an interesting strategy and may free up General Obligation bond capacity for future bonding…on what? We can only wait and see.

The second item, Item #26 is Authorization for Lease Financing of the City Hall Complex. In 2010, the city had to pay the NHL $25M to run the arena. This $25M has been paid to the NHL. Here’s where the money came from:

$21M loan from the city’s Landfill Fund

$4M loan from the city’s Sanitation Fund

In 2011, with the Coyotes ownership issue still not resolved, the city agreed to pay the NHL a second $25 to operate the arena. This $25M is still being held in a city escrow account. Here’s where that money came from:

$15M loan from the city’s Water and Sewer Fund

$2M from the city’s Technology Replacement Fund

$3M from the city’s Vehicle Replacement Fund

$5M to be paid with an unidentified source to NHL

This lease-back deal will replace:

$15M loan to the City’s Water and Sewer Fund

$4M to the city’s Sanitation Fund

$2M to the city’s Technology Replacement Fund

$3M to the city’s Vehicle Replacement Fund

$5M whose source had been unidentified and unfunded to pay the last of the NHL’s second $25M

$1M as a new project to upgrade the city’s Human Resources software

As you can see, that leaves 1 loan payment outstanding and that is the $21M loan from the city’s Landfill fund. That $21M is part of a reserve account to cover landfill closure. Since the landfill is not anticipated to close for 30 years, the city can afford to repay this reserve account over the next 30 years. Is this a good strategy? Yes, it is. It replenishes those Funds so that they can once again operate effectively and gives the city some breathing room to pay back those costs associated with the NHL’s operation of the arena for 2 years. It is a strategy that hopefully this council will approve.

The last item, Item #27 is an increase in rates, primarily to commercial customers for roll-off bins and disposal rates. The rental cost of a roll-off bin increases from $160 to $175 and the disposal fee per ton increases from $18 to $20. These are fees that have not been adjusted in quite some time. As usual, when there are rate increases, it becomes a double-edged sword. As the rates go up, the number of customers may decrease dependent on market competition by private sanitation companies. Nevertheless it is an increase long overdue.

The third and Special Meeting is scheduled for June 28, 2013. Do not look for a vote on the Coyotes unless this meeting agenda is changed and posted by 5 PM on Wednesday, June 26th. . The city, by law, must have its final adoption of Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget Amendments and the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Property Tax Levy before July 1, 2013. These items satisfy that legal prescription and will be largely unnoticed by Glendale residents due to its final adoption on a Friday morning at 9 AM. The other two items, fire-related for strength training and medical transport, were added simply because they could be at this meeting.

There you have it. Three meetings scheduled. Only one of which is the Coyotes ownership issue and we are not privy to its goings on. The other two meetings deal with financial issues created by or related to arena management.

The finale of the Coyotes ownership RSE bid is still scheduled for July 2, 2013. Are there 4 affirmative votes? Only the councilmembers know or think they know. If RSE still wants $15M a year as the management fee and cannot or will not guarantee a minimum of $9M in “enhanced revenue streams” to the city this council may find it a difficult deal to swallow. Are we about to experience deju vu? The very mechanics of the deal could cause the Goldwater Institute to reappear. I suspect they are watching very, very closely. Then there is Ken Jones and his ilk who absolutely hate anything Coyote related. Could they mount another referendum drive? Yes, they could and would just to stall the deal. After all, how long will Fortress Investment Group leave an open-ended loan available to RSE?

Like this:

Related

13 Comments

The end of your article has me a bit worried. It seems like there may be too many hurdles to overcome in order for the Coyotes to stay. I’m just curious, what is your gut instinct on the Coyotes? Will they be here next season?

To things one nhl not looking for there money back for 5yrs.Two I could care less what Ken Jones wants to do.We all know that the tax sigs cost about $4 sig and they got 2700 good ones.So to say they can get around 14,000 to be safe no way not happing.Three this deal is bettman deal it a take or leave it.In some ways i wish they won’t take it.I would love to see glendale go bk.Such a misguided city for yrs.Back in 2002 if you wern’t ready to play with the big boys .They never should have built the arena but they did and are crying about it.Next thing people should know is a lousey deal with Camalback Ranch how caN YOU GIVE 2 TEAMS $1 rent .That is not even close to being right with the people of glendale.Next if the coyotes leave bye bye superbowl.Why would they take a chance on a city that can’t keep a hockey team or westgate open. A 5 yr old can run this city better.Thank god I don’t live in glendale whew….

What gets me riled up is how many times I have posted to “GWI is dead” posters to “know thy enemy”. Even Craig Morgan is posting they are inconsequential. Many won’t admit that to delay can be to win…victory in Court isn’t necessarily needed. Many hang their hat on Kromko v. AZ Board of Regents as per the COG’s brief stating that this case provides grounds that future losses may be applicable to defeat the Gift Clause, and leaving out the fact that a) sales taxes or the loss thereof are not applicable, and b) that the entity (teaching hospital) that was created and what the case it is based on was a creature of a special statute so won’t automatically be considered the norm. A case may eventually rule that indeed the case applies, but the fight that could be waged against it (read delay) could be monstrous. Many also trumpet that the RFP bid established competition and hurt any GWI foray but it could also hurt by giving them the grounds to point at what they would deem realsitic bids vs. 15 million big ones with (perhaps) minimal guarantees on return. Many have said they have been quiet because they are out of the game. If they were, Bolick would have been muzzled. If you invite a dog to bite, he just might even just out of spite. Let sleeping not-for-profits (cough) lie.

Ironically….. I get equally irritated over having to constantly respond to the “Go getem’ GWI!!” crowd that GWI really has no bite in this.

An attorney on another site has even stated GWI had their chance a long time ago to squash any new arena deal, without even needing the “gift clause” to do it. Yet for some reason they chose to ignore it. This gentleman has been very strong in his opinion that Phoenix is not a hockey market and the team should be playing elsewhere. But even he can grasp what is relevant. He’s also not alone in this opinion.

I also understand that GWI’s case against the CoG over timely release of documents involving negotiations was recently dismissed…. with prejudice. Meaning they can no longer pursue it…. ever.

I have no doubt Mr. Bolick will take a look at the “deal” if one is ever released. But if you truly think they’re going to ride in as champions of the relocation set, then I’m afraid you’re in for a very big disappointment. Delay tactics aren’t going to be relevant at this point since the city council is taking care of that tactic on their own.

Thanks Joyce..I was unaware that the records case had been dismissed. I will have to look for that as Tindall’s ill advised and mis-sent email was a very powerful piece of evidence to ignoring a court order. I should make clear that In have always said that for Glendale’s purposes the Coyotes must stay. My position is sometimes taken the other way because I call a spade a spade no matter for or against. I just don’t agree that GWI is for sure “out of the game”. And even if some hold that opinion, eyes should not be removed from them. As for their “delay card” being removed from their hands by the COG, if the deal is approved and they ride in, then your opinion that Fortress won’t hold that loan forever is right on the money. And neither, I should add, may the NHL hold the spot open. But your point is well taken.

Legend..can you provide me a link about the Records case being dismissed? Can’t find anything…also I would be interested in the Attorney you mentioned and his site he publishes on, do you have that too? Thanks.

The attorney I referred to is a regular on the website forum “HFBoards” and uses the account name “CasualFan”. He does not have a blog but he regularly provides his interpretation of legal documents that help an average person like me understand.

Here’s his comment that refers to Goldwater passing on a chance to derail any deal via constitutional grounds, and his opinion that they aren’t going to inject themselves any further.

Thanks very much Legend! I note that it is a minute order regarding application by both parties to dismiss with prejudice so obviously GWI and the COG together agreed for whatever reason to terminate the case..perhaps GWI-wise because the matter was old, expensive and no longer really relevant considering Hulsizer went the way of the dodo bird..I will check the forum later. Again, thanks!!